IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v36y2002i2p95-106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Importance of scenic byways in route choice: a survey of driving tourists in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Eby, David W.
  • Molnar, Lisa J.

Abstract

In order to develop more effective tourist information systems for use along scenic byways, it is important to know the characteristics of those people who include the presence of scenic byways in their selections of routes. Gaining a better understanding of these characteristics was the purpose of this study. The data presented here are from a United States (US) survey of the driving tourist's information needs and preferences weighted to be representative of US tourist travelers. The study showed that when planning a route to a destination on an overnight automobile trip, the driving tourist is most concerned with factors related to the actual driving of the route, such as the directness, safety, amount of congestion, and distance. Of secondary importance are factors that make the route entertaining or pleasant to drive, including whether the route is a scenic byway. Analysis of the importance of scenic byways by several demographic factors showed little difference in importance ratings except for age and household income. Examination of importance ratings by trip characteristics showed that the presence of scenic byways in selecting a route was more important for the traveler whose trip purpose is a vacation, who is in the midst of a long distance and duration trip, who will be either camping or staying in a hotel, and who has planned the trip well in advance. These results suggest that scenic byways are an excellent area for the implementation and testing of in-vehicle information systems for the driving tourist.

Suggested Citation

  • Eby, David W. & Molnar, Lisa J., 2002. "Importance of scenic byways in route choice: a survey of driving tourists in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 95-106, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:36:y:2002:i:2:p:95-106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965-8564(00)00039-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Díez-Gutiérrez, María & Babri, Sahar, 2020. "Explanatory variables underlying the route choice decisions of tourists: The case of Geiranger Fjord in Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 398-409.
    2. Thomas, Tom & Tutert, Bas, 2015. "Route choice behavior in a radial structured urban network: Do people choose the orbital or the route through the city center?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 85-95.
    3. Jaap Vreeswijk & Tom Thomas & Eric Berkum & Bart Arem, 2014. "Perception bias in route choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1305-1321, November.
    4. Liu, Yaping & Zhang, Yu & Nie, Linlin, 2012. "Patterns of self-drive tourists: The case of Nanning City, China," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 225-227.
    5. Hallo, Jeffrey C. & Manning, Robert E., 2009. "Transportation and recreation: a case study of visitors driving for pleasure at Acadia National Park," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 491-499.
    6. Papinski, Dominik & Scott, Darren M., 2011. "A GIS-based toolkit for route choice analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 434-442.
    7. Tongyan Zhang & Shengrui Zhang & Yingjie Wang & Hu Yu & Hongrun Ju & Hanyun Xue, 2022. "Selection of the Most Scenic Viewpoints on an Island Based on Space–Time Perception: The Case of Nan’ao Island, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:36:y:2002:i:2:p:95-106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.